What is the basis for attributing human rights responsibilities to transnational corporations under international human rights law? International Law A fundamental difficulty in attributing human rights responsibilities to TNCs is the current legal paradigm that holds states as the primary holders of responsibilities under international law. International human rights law thus places clear obligations on States to promote and protect human rights, a duty that relates not just to protection from violations by the State, but also to violations by any person or entity within the State. By contrast, international human rights instruments generally refers only to the duty of individuals and others to respect human rights, including through observance of the laws and directives promulgated by the State to promote the enjoyment of human rights. The preamble of the UDHR provides that: “… every individual and every organ of society ... shall strive ... to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and ... to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance”. The responsibility of non-State actors to respect rights is supported by commentary from the UN treaty bodies, as highlighted in the statement of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CECSR) on the right to food: “The private business sector – national and transnational – should pursue its activities within the framework of a code of conduct conducive to respect of the right to adequate food, agreed upon jointly with the Government and civil society”. Attempts to further clarify the human rights obligations of TNCs at international law have met with limited success. The adoption by the UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights of the “United Nations Norms on the responsibilities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises with regard to human rights”, (the UN Norms), was the most ambitious attempt to regulate the activities of TNCs with regard to human rights. Adopted in 2003, the 14 operative norms claim to elaborate existing human rights standards in areas ranging from international criminal and humanitarian law; civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights; consumer protection and environmental practices. However, concerns that the UN Norms sought to expand existing human rights obligations ensured the initiative failed to gain the support of the international community and the Norms were never formally adopted. Guidelines, Principles and Voluntary Codes In the absence of an international legal framework, voluntary codes, guidelines and principles developed by international organisations and the private sector sought to fill the void. In 1976, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development adopted its Guidelines for MultiNational Enterprises, (the OECD Guidelines), 3 and a year later, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) adopted the Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises (the ILO Principles).4 Both the OECD guidelines and the ILO Principles sought to provide general guidance on the application of international human rights standards to TNCs, but did not create legal obligations at international law. Further developments have occurred in the past decade with the development of various general and industry specific codes. Of broadest application is the United Nations Global Compact. Launched in 2002, the voluntary initiative has more than 2,300 participating companies and seeks to promote responsible business practice through the elaboration of ten principles in the areas of human rights, labour, the environment and anti-corruption. Sector or industry codes have also proliferated. Examples include: 3 Available at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/56/36/1922428.pdf 4 Available at: http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/multi/download/english.pdf -6-